WORDS HAVE MEANING BUT ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER

The basic pillars of Obama's campaign to be the Democratic Presidential nominee is "CHANGE". A slogan that coupled with his eloquence and good looks have apparently captured the hearts and minds of many Americans. His stunning victories in the last ten primaries are stark testimony of his messianic powers. But my question to those who think he is the savior that will cure government ills is this. Why did he not introduce any legislation in the Senate, during his two year stint in that poweful body of government? He had over two years to at least propose law that would advance his campaign promises long before he took to the campaign trail. There is no better "monday morning quarterback" than a politician running for office. It is easy to express indignation and make promises about "hot button" items while campaigning. Never the less, we voters must choose a man/woman who is not only good with words, but has demonstrated the ability and proclivity to affect change! In this bloggers opinion it would be better if he took positions in the Senate on Abortion, partial birth abortion and amnesty for illegals long before he started spewing platitutdes on the campaign trail. In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion, & against a 2000 bill banning government funding. Although these bills included an exception to save the life of the mother. For his stand on this and voting against requiring parents of minors to be notified prior to performing an abortion, have acquired a rating of zero from the National Right to life Organisation! In the illegal alien problem he also has had plenty to say that worrys me. In a meeting of La Razza in Miami Beach he said this: “Find out how many senators appeared before an immigration rally last year. Who was talking the talk, and who walked the walk — because I walked,” Mr. Obama said at the National Council of La Raza’s annual convention in Miami Beach. “I didn’t run away from the issue, and I didn’t just talk about it in front of Latino audiences.” The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate “was both ugly and racist in a way we haven’t see since the struggle for civil rights.”… Mr. Obama was the most forceful, promising “in my first term we will make this a priority and get this done.” He promises amnesty! Why did he not introduce a bill to that effect in the two years preceeding the Presidential campaign? He has shown why, while in the Illinois Legislature he voted present 130 times, so he could not be branded as either for or against issues. A perfect example of his duplicity was reported in the New York Times with this: "In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate. In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator". We don't need a "fence sitter" in the Oval Office.